Q004 — Self-Audit¶


Research	R0024 — Sycophancy and Addiction
Run	2026-03-25
Query	Q004

ROBIS 4-Domain Audit¶

Domain 1: Eligibility Criteria¶

Rating: Pass

Criterion	Assessment
Evidence criteria defined before searching	Yes — company disclosures, regulatory actions, and critical assessments of sycophancy metrics
Criteria applied consistently	Yes
Criteria did not shift after seeing results	Pass

Notes: Clear eligibility criteria focused on published metrics and commitments.

Domain 2: Search Comprehensiveness¶

Rating: Pass

Criterion	Assessment
Multiple search strategies used	Yes — three searches targeting industry overview, specific company metrics, and regulatory action
Searches designed to test each hypothesis	Yes — searched for both presence and absence of commitments
All results dispositioned	Yes — 40 results total, all dispositioned
Source diversity achieved	Yes — company self-reports, critical analysis, and regulatory action

Notes: 3 searches, 40 results dispositioned, 4 sources selected from diverse perspectives.

Domain 3: Evaluation Consistency¶

Rating: Pass

Criterion	Assessment
All sources scored using same framework	Yes
Evidence typed consistently	Yes
ACH matrix applied	Yes
Diagnosticity analysis performed	Yes

Notes: Company self-reports correctly rated with higher COI/Funding risk than external sources.

Domain 4: Synthesis Fairness¶

Rating: Pass

Criterion	Assessment
All hypotheses given fair hearing	Yes — H1 acknowledged where evidence supports it (Anthropic metrics)
Contradictory evidence surfaced	Yes — paradoxical increase in newer model sycophancy noted
Confidence calibrated to evidence	Yes — nuanced assessment reflecting mixed evidence
Gaps acknowledged	Yes — four specific gaps identified

Notes: The assessment balances recognition of genuine effort (Anthropic) with criticism of insufficient commitments (industry-wide), reflecting the evidence fairly.

Overall Assessment¶

Overall risk of bias: Low risk

The main bias risk was being overly critical of industry efforts given the regulatory framing. This was mitigated by acknowledging Anthropic's concrete metrics and the fact that some progress has been made.

Researcher Bias Check¶

Anchoring bias risk: Some concern. The 42-state AG letter sets a critical frame that could bias toward finding industry efforts insufficient. Mitigated by acknowledging Anthropic's specific achievements.
COI awareness: The assessment explicitly flags that company self-reports have inherent COI and rates them accordingly.